Template talk:Uncategorized

Merger

I have now made a new version of the template in the sandbox which adds , in addition to a stub category if either |stub= is set to yes or the template has a stub template. I have also looked at tools using the alternative category tree for {{uncategorized stub}} and couldn't find any, there seems to be some using the template though, but that shouldn't be a problem since they will still work with a redirect. Bearcat is there anything I've missed? ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 10:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

That's all excellent. I'm no expert at making complex templates, so I could never have pulled some of that code off myself — so thanks and bravo for that.

At least a couple of the participants in the discussion identified that the template could be reworded slightly, such as changing "added to any categories" to "added to any content categories". That's probably a change worth making, and even if not everybody in the discussion explicitly supported it I don't think anybody in the discussion opposed it. But that's a very easy fix that will take a whopping one or two seconds at most to apply, so it's not a reason to delay this any further.

I'll need to double check whether the Untagged Uncategorized Articles toolserver (which is offsite) depends on the "uncategorized stub" categories or not — I suspect it doesn't, because the last time it got borked by XFD-created changes to the categorization project's maintenance categories the issue related to Category:All uncategorized pages rather than any of the monthly subcategories, but even if it does the fix will have to be applied over at Toolforge rather than here. So I'll check in with one of the tool maintainers over there about it, and it's not a reason to hold off here.

The only other thing I can think of is alerting User:Anomie to remove the "Uncategorized stubs" categories from the list of monthly maintenance categories that AnomieBot automatically creates at the end of the month — because if we're basically dropping the separate stubs queue out of use by merging the templates, then there's no point in having its categories automatically created anymore just to have to redelete them as empty and unused. But that's also a relatively quick fix that doesn't have to delay this: merging the templates doesn't actually depend on it, so doing that can be left until after the merger is complete.

Otherwise, I think we're basically ready to move forward; I can't think of anything else. I suppose it's possible that unexpected consequences may still pop up after the fact, but if they do we can fix them when we get to them. Thanks again. Bearcat (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Great I've implemented it and done some spot checks. Everything looks good as far as I can tell. AnomieBOT just looks through Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories sorted by month so that shouldn't be a problem. I had a look at the Untagged Uncategorized Articles tool and I'm fairly certain nothing should break there, but I can't see the code so there's always a risk. Thank you for your great feedback! ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 16:36, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Placement redux

Greetings and felicitations. The current recommendation is that this template be placed at the bottom of articles. However, this contradicts MOS:SECTIONORDER (and MOS:LEADELEMENTS), which state that cleanup templates belong at the top of an article.

1. Before the lead section[...]

3. Maintenance / dispute tags

The bottom of article is where editors look for categories, but it is not where most of us look for article-wide cleanup templates. Placing this cleanup template at the bottom of articles also buries it where it won't be seen, especially in longer articles and narrower browser windows. Please, let us change the placement to be in line with the MOS and logic. —DocWatson42 (talk) 06:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Placement of this template

The placement of {{improve categories}} and {{uncategorised}} is the subject of an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout#RfC: Category maintenance templates in MOS:ORDER. Options suggested include specifying that they should go at the bottom below stubs, or below categories but above stubs, or not be mentioned (ie by implication go with the other maintenance templates near the top). PamD 09:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Template's wording

There seems to be something odd about the way this template ends up being worded when transcluded into an article. I added it to Miroglyph—a newly created uncategorized article—and the wording of the template is given as

This has not been added to any content categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar s.

in which the final word seems to have be left out except for the letter "s". Of course, it's quite possible that I added the template incorrectly, but the same thing is seen in other instances of the template's use in other articles (e.g. Rajula Tallavalasa, Precision diagnostics, Semistable reduction theorem). The last word could "articles" or "ones", but it should be something more that "___s". -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 28 June 2022

Please revert the changes in Special:Diff/1094667280 (i.e., {{NAMESPACE}} should be changed back to {{pagetype|subjectspace=yes}} and the capitalized "Category" in the "#ifeq" statement should be changed back to the lowercase form "category"). Those changes are causing the error in articles reported above. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

This should be looked at by editor Gonnym. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 03:50, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. Gonnym (talk) 04:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Should we make some kind of list for uncategorized articles?

It would be helpful for searching for uncategorized pages. Abdullah raji (talk) 16:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)